Cited by 10Smoking Behavior and CessationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Do medications increase the efficacy of digital interventions for smoking cessation? Secondary results from the iCanQuit randomized trial

Open access
Bricker, Jonathan B., Santiago‐Torres, Margarita, Mull, Kristin E., Sullivan, Brianna M., David, Sean P., Schmitz, Joy, Stotts, Angela, Rigotti, Nancy A.·2024·Addiction

Abstract

Background and aims: iCanQuit is a smartphone application (app) proven efficacious for smoking cessation in a Phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT). This study aimed to measure whether medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for smoking cessation would further enhance the efficacy of iCanQuit, relative to its parent trial comparator—the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) QuitGuide app. Design: Secondary analysis of the entire parent trial sample of a two‐group (iCanQuit and QuitGuide), stratified, doubled‐blind RCT. Setting: United States. Participants: Participants who reported using an FDA‐approved cessation medication on their own (n = 619) and those who reported no use of cessation medications (n = 1469). Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive iCanQuit app or NCI's QuitGuide app. Measurements: Use of FDA‐approved medications was measured at 3 months post‐randomization. Smoking cessation outcomes were measured at 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was 12‐month self‐reported 30‐day point prevalence abstinence (PPA). Findings: The data retention rate at the 12‐month follow‐up was 94.0%. Participants were aged 38.5 years, 71.0% female, 36.6% minority race/ethnicity, 40.6% high school or less education, residing in all 50 US States and smoking 19.2 cigarettes/day. The 29.6% of all participants who used medications were more likely to choose nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; 78.8%) than other cessation medications (i.e. varenicline or bupropion; 18.3 and 10.5%, respectively) and use did not differ by app treatment assignment (all P > 0.05). There was a significant (P = 0.049) interaction between medication use and app treatment assignment on PPA. Specifically, 12‐month quit rates were 34% for iCanQuit versus 20% for QuitGuide [odds ratio (OR) = 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.59, 3.49] among participants reporting any medication use, whereas among participants reporting no medication use, quit rates were 28% for iCanQuit versus 22% for QuitGuide (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.09, 1.82). Results were stronger for those using only NRT: 40% quit rates for iCanQuit versus 18% quit rates for QuitGuide (OR = 3.57, 95% CI = 2.20, 5.79). Conclusions: The iCanQuit smartphone app for smoking cessation was more efficacious than the QuitGuide smartphone app, regardless of whether participants used medications to aid cessation. Smoking cessation medications, especially nicotine replacement therapy, might enhance the efficacy of the iCanQuit app.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/add.16396

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [54]54. Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1(3):385-401
  2. [58]58. S.C. H, K.D. S, K.G. W. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: The Process and Practice of Mindful Change. Second edition ed: The Guilford Press; 2016.
  3. [59]59. HS C, Get SS Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life: The New Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Illustrated edition ed. New Harbinger Publications2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bricker, J. B., Santiago‐Torres, M., Mull, K. E., Sullivan, B. M., David, S. P., Schmitz, J., Stotts, A., & Rigotti, N. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Bricker, Jonathan B.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-11-27
Volume
119
Issue
4
Pages
664-676
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W4389037358
Cited by
10
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA192849)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
smoking cessation, digital interventions, mobile application, nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, bupropion, medication use, abstinence, quit rates, adverse drug reactions
MeSH terms
Varenicline, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Nicotiana, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Smoking Cessation, Bupropion, Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic, Tobacco Use Cessation Devices, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review